Excuse me but I think most of you are missing the point about why the left is against abstaining from sex until after marriage, and why they push queer sex and want it taught in school.
It has to do with one of the goals of communism, which is to completely destroy the moral fabric of a society and replace it with the state.

This is apparent if you study how they have taken control of many countries(all have failed of course). They destroy the family(sound familiar) unit because this leaves fewer loyalties and breeds dependence on the state. Indiscriminate sex also destroys loyalties and discourages ties to other people.

"Excuse me but I think most of you are missing the point about why the left is against abstaining from sex until after marriage"

Oh oh I know! The answer is: There is absolutely no reason to arbitrarily deny natural urges that are both fun and safe to indulge in.

"and why they push queer sex and want it taught in school."

Homosexual teenagers deserve proper sex education as much as heterosexuals.

"It has to do with one of the goals of communism, which is to completely destroy the moral fabric of a society and replace it with the state."

Please to read the communist manifesto (or at least an economics textbook) then come back kthx. (protip: replace the words; "moral fabric" with "capitalist free market")

"This is apparent if you study how they have taken control of many countries(all have failed of course)."

Is that why China is failing so hard? Is that why America is failing so hard? (I mean when you lot seized control from the British you were pretty left wing) Is that why Russia had you cowering under your beds for the better part of 50 years?

"They destroy the family(sound familiar) unit because this leaves fewer loyalties and breeds dependence on the state."

No it doesn't. If the state breaks up families that breeds discontent towards the state. War tends to foster a dependence on the state, with the populace rallying behind the government against a common enemy only the state has the resources to combat.

"Indiscriminate sex also destroys loyalties and discourages ties to other people."

I disagree. I find it encourages ties, people become suddenly much nicer to you after you have great sex, with the promise of more to come...

That's some excellent use of weasel words there. Your post quite fails to address or even acknowledge that there's a whole window between "abstaining from sex until after marriage," your first phrase, and "indiscriminate sex," your second phrase used synonymously with the first: that of discriminate sex before marriage. Which is what the majority of us do, and which it would therefore be far more relevant to the issue for you to actually face.

I am idealistic enough to think that most people should abstain until they are mature enough to handle it and in a committed relationship (which, more often than not, tends to equate to marriage). However, I am also realistic enough to understand that quite a lot of teenagers will not abstain from sex no matter how much you push abstinence.

Comprehensive sex ed basically says, "You shouldn't go around having sex at your age, but if you're going to disregard that piece of advice, at least have the decency to protect yourself and your partner with a condom."

Of course, my reasons for pushing abstinence have nothing to do with sex being "dirty." I view it as a sacred act, in all its forms, and that coercion and irresponsibility regarding sex profane it. My Christian boyfriend may not agree with my theology, but he likes my views on sex. We have had responsible, monogamous, pre-marital sex for quite a while now.

The "left" (which to you probably means any of the 80% who are to the left of Ann Coulter) isn't against abstaining from sex until after marriage. Abstaining is fine. But most people don't do it. What people are against is not having a back-up plan to prevent unwanted pregnancy - sex education and birth control - in case people don't abstain until marriage.

Marriage is just ownership, control. It's words on a paper, something that can be absolved just as easily as it's entered into. The important thing is the people involved, not the "magic" words. If two people promise each other to stay together for as long as they both want to, then that is enough. You don't need to do it in front of a priest or a judge.

Lots and lots of people over here never marry, they live together for decades without the "magic" words.

Who said we wanted queer sex taught in schools? Sex ed is not a practical class, but a theoretical one. Just as kids should know how a transistor or a computer works, they should know how their own body works, how it reacts, how to protect it from unwanted pregnancies and STDs, how to deal with STDs. Also, how the opposite gender body works, and how a baby is formed.

"The left" isn't so much against your moral values as they are against you PUSHING your moral values on everyone else and saying it's the only way. There's nothing wrong with abstaining from sex until marriage, and there is ALSO nothing wrong with having sex before marriage. There is nothing wrong with being straight, and there is ALSO nothing wrong with being queer. People who disagree with you are not trying to take over the country and force you to be gay or whatever the fuck. Stop looking at the world with this paranoid "with us or against us" mentality.

They destroy the family(sound familiar)

Hey, guess what asshole - queer people's families are families too! Wow! We don't want to destroy your family, we want to protect OUR families and have the same rights as yours.